I am not claiming to be an expert on the subject being discussed, I am not a member of either committee, but I believe the base metals listed in and categorized by B2.1 are based on carbon equivalency (chemistry) and to a limited extent, by their mechanical properties.

AWS D1.1 groups the materials based on their carbon equivalencies, the need for preheat, and their mechanical properties relative to the construction of steel framed structures.

There are many steels available, but they may not have wide usage in certain applications. The codes do not usually prohibit the use of certain steels, but if they do not have a history of successful use the codes typically require the user to demonstrate they will perform as expected and will meet certain specified properties. Provided the minimum requirements can be met when a demonstration, i.e., a successful PQR, is made, the unlisted material can be used.

Anyone can request the inclusion of a specific material specification in an AWS code or even an ASME code if they can provide the test data that shows the material is appropriate for the application. All it takes is someone with deep pockets to do the testing and present the data to the appropriate committees. In Shawn's case I would think the local steel manufacturer's would do the necessary testing and provide the requisite test data to either or both AWS and ASME if the market (future sales) could justify the expense of doing so. If queried, I would not be surprised if the steel manufacturers said it was easier to meet the existing material specifications rather than going through the process of getting their materials approved and listed. That may change in the future with the increased importance of foreign trade between nations.

We live in a market driven global market. When the economics are right, thing happen and things change.

As for why the code committees do not undertake the studies themselves? Where is the economic benefit to the volunteer members and where is the money going to come from to run the requisite testing needed to include the multitude of foreign material specifications?

Shawn, this is the perfect time for you to step up to the plate and do the necessary testing and make the submission for your materials to be approved for use by the code committee of your choice. If you have the time, the money, and the desire, there is nothing preventing you from doing what is necessary to have your materials approved for use by AWS, ASME, NAVSEA, AMS, etc.

Don’t ask why they are not doing it? Ask why you aren’t doing it.

Best regards - Al

Hi KOON Shane,
Sawasdee khrab!

How about if the same group of ABS grade Higher-strength Hull Structural Steel( AH 36,DH 36,EH 36,FH 36). Is this  WPS  can write for qualified FH 36 to EH 36,DH 36, AH 36? ( CVN  AH 36 0 C, DH 36 -20 C, EH 36 -40 C, FH 36 -60 C) my opinion is The qualification on steel grades of higher toughness requirements will qualify the grades of lower toughness but not vice versa.

Kop koon khrab,

winai